Welcome to the Piano World Piano ForumsOver 2 million posts about pianos, digital pianos, and all types of keyboard instruments
Join the World's Largest Community of Piano Lovers
(it's free)
It's Fun to Play the Piano ... Please Pass It On!

I know my list isn't very interesting, standard popular pieces but these are truly which I love beyond any others! I am however looking forward to the more distinctive choices which will doubtlessly ensue such as the Shostakoviches, Prokofievs, Tchaikovskys, Saint-Saens, Mendelssohns, et al!

If these are the "ten greatest concertos", then they are "great" by what criteria?

Or are we saying "These are my ten favourite concertos..." There's a difference.[/b]It is improbable to separate the two. I find it paradoxical for an individual to find anything "great" and yet they do not appreciate it, unless you were to mean something where villains dwell...in which case, there are many composers whose concertos I think fall into that category (of "great" because they are deplorable). But then, the "great" ones that I like far exceed the "great" ones that I find deplorable, so this is still an exercise in futility.

But I will give Saint-Saens 2 an honorable mention for "worst concerto ever". Perhaps we could name this category the "Hitler Great", after a man whom, I'm sure we'd all agree, was great, though deplorably so.

What recording of the Mendelssohn is your favorite ?[/b]Currently, it's actually Lang Lang's, but there are many interpretations left to listen to I am sure.

_________________________
Every day we are afforded a new chance. The problem with life is not that you run out of chances. In the end, what you run out of are days.

Going to have to disagree seriously with whoever said Lang Lang's Mendelssohn is "pure garbage" - the playing is stunning, and it is the type of work that suits his temperament very, very well. To my ears, he plays it much better than anybody else I've heard, including Thibaudet, Hough, Shelley, Serkin, Perahia, etc.

Unfortunately, the Tchaikovsky on the same disc is rather atrocious in my opinion. But this does not detract from the Mendelssohn. Lang Lang's recording is my favourite for this work by far.

Originally posted by e60m5: Going to have to disagree seriously with whoever said Lang Lang's Mendelssohn is "pure garbage" - the playing is stunning, and it is the type of work that suits his temperament very, very well. [/b]

Well I will say that it's not filled with the usual Lang Lang quirks, but it just feels a little bit 'autopilot' for my tastes. Quite similar to his Haydn sonata at Carnegie hall - he can play the notes, but you get the feeling he has no thoughts to go along with them.

Recently I've been exploring some of the lesser known concertos. There are some good ones out there that don't get much mention: Dvorak, (especially) Paderewski, Scharwenka, Poulenc, Busoni, Khachaturian...

Originally posted by Derulux:If these are the "ten greatest concertos", then they are "great" by what criteria?

Or are we saying "These are my ten favourite concertos..." There's a difference.[/b]It is improbable to separate the two. I find it paradoxical for an individual to find anything "great" and yet they do not appreciate it, [/b]

There's nothing necessarily paradoxical about it at all. If I am reading critical biographies of composers whose works I do not know well enough to judge their "greatness" but am told by more than one esteemed historian that these works are indeed among the greatest in the genre, then I would have to acknowledge their "greatness" even though I could not voice an opinion on whether or not I like them.

Conversely, for someone to list (his/her) top 10 Greatest Keyboard Concertos of All Time! (sure sounds like a pop list to me) in one post and then say s/he hasn't heard 90% of the ten (fairly standard works) listed in the following post, then I do believe we are talking about personal likes rather than criteria of greatness. So, yes, there is a difference between establishing criteria of what makes a work great and more simply just listing the works that one likes.

Hence, my question : Are we talking about what concertos we like best - which is what seems to be the case - or are we trying to compile a list of what concertos are really considered among the greatest written? If the latter be the case, I was merely asking by what criteria we are going to judge their greatness.

Brucey me boy you're thinking too much into this all! Semantics can be argued to all eternity you know that! Whether you title it greatness or "opion OF" greatness what's the difference, obviously physics nor mathematics can accurately prove which piece is "greater" than another so obviously anytime someone claims greatness it should inherently understood as OPINION ONLY!

The list is done to see which pieces get the most points and make the top 10 so that we can see (for fun) the general breakdown of what people at PianoWorld think are the top 10 pieces. Do you get it now??????????

Are not ALL POLLS popularity polls? Even Time Magazine's top 100 Innovators or anything of that sort. Nobel Peace Prize, it's all about popularity and opinion. No one in the world can actually PROVE that anything is better or greater than something else, who can PROVE to me Einstein is greater than Newton, for anything you say I can easily counter you with my own "opinion". So in a sense I just feel it's just a given and should be inherently understood that ALL POLLS are opinion/popularity polls wouldn't you agree? Unless of course the poll specifically states something mathematically like, "list the top 10 grossing movies of all time" obviously that can be deduced and quanticized because you can look at the figures and see which movie made more money.